In 1980 L. M. de Rijk edited some texts connected with medieval disputation ( Die mittelaterlichen Traktate De modo opponendi et respondendi ), towards which he showed a strikingly contemptuous attitude. The reason for his contempt was that the treatises did not fit the obligationes and sophismata tradition. In this article I focus on the original version, the Thesaurus Philosophorum , to highlight the distinction of this family of treatises with respect to the “modern“ tradition. First, I study the features (...) of the disputation that can be recognised through the collection of fallacious arguments contained in the Thesaurus . Second, I briefly examine the contents of the treatise and their arrangement, showing that they are closely related to the kind of disputation in question. I hope to support the idea that neither the technique of disputation nor the contents and their arrangement deserve a straightforward rejection. (shrink)

In an article published in 2003, Klaus Jacobi—using texts partially edited in De Rijk's LogicaModernorum —demonstrated that twelfth-century logic contains a tradition of reflecting about some of the transcendental names . In addition to reinforcing Jacobi's thesis with other texts, this contribution aims to demonstrate two points: 1) That twelfth-century logical reflection about transcendental terms has its origin in the logica vetus , and especially in a passage from Porphyry Isagoge and in Boethius's commentary on it. (...) In spite of the loss of the major part of the Aristotelian corpus, the twelfth-century masters in logic still received some Aristotelian theses concerning the notions of one and being via Porphyry and Boethius; on the basis of such theses, they were able to elaborate a sort of proto-theory of the transcendentals as trans-categorical terms. 2) That this theory is centred on the idea that there exists a particular group of names which have the property that they can be said of everything; this group includes "being", "one", "thing" and "something" . Twelfth-century masters in logic try to question the thesis that these terms are equivocal, although they do not deny it completely. (shrink)

“Can Hegel's Philosophy of Right do without the Science of Logic ?”. The question posed by this paper’s title refers to the attempts of some contemporary authors, amongst them Axel Honneth, to update the central theses of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right , though precisely (and deliberately) doing so without its alleged dependence on the Science of Logic . On account of several methodological and hermeneutical reasons, it is not easy to answer this question. It is well known that Hegel emphatically (...) asserts that both works and philosophical projects depend on each other, but there is no consensus amongst specialists on how much the Logic actually influences the Philosophy of Right and in what way it does so. On the other hand, clearly any social philosophy needs a logical theory in a broad sense, whether it may be Hegelian or not. This is even more so if the aim is to update the Hegelian construction implicit in the notion of freedom. In any case, the discussion seems to bring forth the paradox of asserting both the current relevance and the obsolescence of the Hegelian notion of freedom. (shrink)

This article presents the general outlines of a new reading of the concept of contingent possibilities discussed in chapter 9 of the treatise On interpretation. In this article, I try to show how that text represents the moment of logical and ontological grounding of the ethic concept of freedom within Aristotle’s work.

This article is devoted to give reasons against the naturalization of logic, in a sense which entails a revision of this science. The paper criticizes each historical important attempt to revise logical laws – intuitionism, quantum logic, alternative logics – and also it tries to argue that the explanation problem of quantum mechanics has nothing to do with a naturalization of logic.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the philosophical task of clarifying the concept of logical consequence. First, two criteria of adequacy for an elucidation of this concept will be elected : (1) truth preservation in the instances, or material adequacy and (2) guarantee of the truth of the conclusion in valid inferences, or epistemic adequacy. Then, Tarski's proposal (1956) and the corresponding criticism of Etchemendy (2008) will be presented. The paper is concluded with some commentaries regarding the nature (...) of logical investigations. (shrink)

The present article tries to emphasize the roll of the experimental logic in the process of education-learning of the methodology of the investigation. Its treatment usually appears as material for the later boarding of the explanation or the calls explanatory designs or explanatory reconnaissanc..

In this paper we compare the thesis of underdetermination of theories with the thesis of indeterminacy of translation. Drawing upon this comparison, we argue that, in the context of Quine’s philosophy, the thesis of indeterminacy of translation can only be maintained if it is taken as establishing an indeterminacy in the logical form of sentences. Consequently, we contend that Quine lacks a solid argument for indeterminacy of translation.

The decisive role played by Ortega and his “School of Madrid” in modernizing the 20th century Spanish thinking is widely accepted, but their contribution to bring our logic up to day was rather unfortunate: far from backing the introduction or reception of modern logic, the “School of Madrid” attempted an alternative logic, the so-called ‘logic of vital reason’, non-viable. As it is a symptomatic failure, I’ll give a broader account of it starting from, and going through, a confrontation in this (...) respect between the “School of Madrid” and its contemporary “School of Barcelona”. (shrink)

The present work consists on figuring out the problematic relationships between the Logic of the Period of Jena and the internal emergence of a Dialectical one to the own system. Dialectical is more than a simple general methodology of the knowledge.

The aim of this paper is to elucidate some aspects of Karl Poppers logic of research and place it in the philosophical discussion of scientific discovery. A closer look into his proposal reveals that his work, in the light of recent literature, does point into the direction of some fundamental m..

En esta nota crítica (i) se hace una breve descripción de cada uno de los artículos que componen Orayen: de la forma lógica al significado, (ii) se señalan algunas cuestiones que no están claras en ellos o en las réplicas de Orayen y, (iii) en la medida de lo posible, se indica si los autores desarrollan ulteriormente los problemas abordados en sus artículos. The aim of this critical note is threefold: (i) it briefly describes and comments on each of the (...) articles of Orayen: de la forma lógica al significado; (ii) identifies some issues that may not be clear enough or not fully developed whether in the articles or even in Orayen's replies; (iii) as far as possible, it refers to further studies made by the authors themselves on the same, or quite related, subjects addressed by them in their papers. (shrink)

Raul Orayen's book _Lógica, significado y ontología_ is a deep study into a range of issues in the philosophy of logic, taking Quine as the main interlocutor. It goes into subjects such as Truth-bearerss, Logical Truth, Validity, Propositions, Quine's Extensionalism, Relevant Logic and disjunctive syllogism, and Castañeda's ontology of Guises.

Uno de los fundamentos más reconocidos para una lectura metafísica de Hegel es el carácter totalitario de un sistema que intenta abarcar todo lo que es, determinando el lugar y papel de cada parte en el todo. Si la verdad es el todo, sólo tendremos acceso a ella al acceder a éste. Este artículo pretende mostrar que el todo en Hegel nunca es accesible por completo al pensamiento; que su característica principal es estar determinado de manera negativa, es decir, por (...) lo que no es. Para ello ofreceré un análisis de los conceptos de infinito y necesidad en la Ciencia de la lógica, proporcionando así algunas herramientas conceptuales para una lectura no-metafísica de Hegel; es decir, una lectura que enfatiza elementos hermenéuticos y críticos que comúnmente no se asocian con la filosofía de Hegel. One of the strongest pillars for a metaphysical reading of Hegel is the totalitarian aspect of a system that attempts to cover all of reality, determining the place and function of each being in the whole. If the truth is the whole, we will only gain access to it through access to the whole. This paper attempts to show that the whole in Hegel is never totally accessible to thinking; that its main characteristic is to be determined negatively, that is, by what it is not. To do so, an analysis of the concepts of the infinite and necessity will be offered as they appear in the Science of Logic, in order to provide certain conceptual tools for a non-metaphysical reading of Hegel, that is, a reading that emphasizes hermeneutic and critical elements not commonly associated with Hegel's philosophy. (shrink)

There is an error in the completeness proof for the {λ, =} part of FOIL-K. The error occurs in Section 4, in the text following the proof of Corollary 4.7, and concerns the deﬁnition of the interpretation I on relation symbols. Before this point in the paper, for each object variable v an equivalence class v has been deﬁned, and for each intension variable f a function f has been deﬁned. Then the following deﬁnition is given for a relation symbol (...) P : v1, v2, . . . , f1, f2, . . . ∈ I(P )(Γ) just in case there are w1, w2, . . . in d(Γ) with wi ∈ vi such that P (w1, w2, . . . , f1, f2, . . .) ∈ Γ. It was pointed out by Torben Brauner that we could have f1 and g1 being the same function, but also have P (w1, w2, . . . , f1, f2, . . .) ∈ Γ without having P (w1, w2, . . . , g1, f2, . . .) ∈ Γ. Our solution is to modify the deﬁnition of the model, rather artiﬁcially, so that if f and g are the same function, then f and g are syntactically the same intension variable. This is done as follows. First, arbitrarily choose some object variable w, and its corresponding equivalence class w. For each intension variable f we deﬁne a disambiguation world ˆ. (shrink)

En "Legal Reasons, Sources and Gaps", Raz señala que las lagunas jurídicas existen sólo cuando el derecho habla con voz incierta o cuando habla con muchas voces, pero que no hay lagunas cuando el derecho guarda silencio. En este último caso habría reglas de clausura, analíticamente verdaderas, que impiden la ocurrencia de esas lagunas. Según Raz, si hay una laguna en un sistema jurídico, entonces no es verdadero ni falso que exista una razón concluyente para ejecutar cierta acción. Así, una (...) de las contribuciones más importantes de Raz a la solución del problema de las lagunas jurídicas es subrayar que el discurso jurídico no está completamente controlado por la bivalencia. Sin embargo, a menudo se sostiene que el rechazo de la bivalencia conduce a contradicciones. Si esta afirmación fuese verdadera, entonces la solución de Raz al problema de las lagunas jurídicas se vería seriamente amenazada. En este artículo mostramos, con ayuda de una herramienta analítica sofisticada, i.e., la lógica de la verdad de G.H. von Wright, que el rechazo de la bivalencia sólo nos compromete a aceptar la conclusión trivial de que puede haber proposiciones que no son verdaderas ni falsas. Por esta razón, el trabajo de Raz todavía puede ser considerado un buen punto de partida para analizar las relaciones entre normas, razonamiento práctico y lagunas jurídicas. Sin embargo, también mostramos que para admitir proposiciones que no son verdaderas ni falsas, las tesis de Raz deben ser reformuladas. De otra manera, la tesis de que no existen lagunas cuando el derecho guarda silencio no sería compatible con el rechazo de la bivalencia. /// In his paper "Legal Reasons, Sources and Gaps", Raz says that legal gaps only exist when law speaks with uncertain voice or when it speaks with many voices, but there are no gaps when law is silent. In this later case, rules of closure, which are analytically true, prevent from the occurrence of gaps. According to Raz, if there is a gap in a legal system, then both the claim that there is a conclusive legal reason to perform a certain action, and its negation are neither true nor false. Therefore, one of the Raz's most important contributions to the solution of the problem of legal gaps is to remark that legal discourse is not altogether governed by the principie of bivalence. However, philosophers often claim that the denial of bivalence leads to a logical inconsistency. If this claim were true, then Raz's solution to the problem of gaps would be seriously threatened. In this paper we show--with the aid of a sophisticated analytical tool, i.e., von Wright's truth-logic--that the rejection of bivalence only commits us to accept the trivial conclusion that propositions can lack truth-values. For this reason, Raz's paper can still be regarded as a good starting-point for analyzing the relationships between norms, practical reasoning and legal gaps. However, we also show that in order to admit propositions which are neither true nor false, Raz's theses must be reformulated. Otherwise, the claim that there is no gap when law is silent would not be compatible with the rejection of bivalence. (shrink)